Video Voyeurism Case Clears Legal Hurdle

Evidence that a Central Kitsap man videotaped people using restrooms at a local golf driving range will be used in his prosecution despite protests over the search warrant that helped uncover the computer files used to bring the charges, a judge determined Tuesday.

A lawyer for Scott A. Fuchs, 41, contended that police obtained a search warrant for criminal activity unrelated to the computer files and videos that ultimately led prosecutors to charge him with voyeurism, and that an informant police relied upon was not credible, making the warrant invalid.

Detectives with the Bremerton Police Department's undercover Special Operations Group had applied for a search warrant at Fuchs' Fairgrounds Road residence after a confidential informant agreed to buy marijuana there in a buy set up and monitored by police.

When the informant returned with marijuana, police applied for a search warrant. While inside Fuchs' home in early December, they found computer and camera equipment that allegedly had about 50 hours of footage of people using the restrooms at the Northwest Golf Range off Highway 303, according to court documents.

Thomas Weaver, Fuchs' attorney, argued in Kitsap County Superior Court Tuesday that searching the home for marijuana shouldn't have led to the powering up of his computer and video camera, and that the police's informant's criminal history and recent arrests made her unreliable. If the search warrant for marijuana was invalid, Weaver argued, then law enforcement should never received an additional warrant to search the computer and camera.

Kevin Hull, deputy prosecutor handling the case, argued that police were entitled to check computers under the warrant, and that the informant was reliable regardless of her criminal troubles.

Kitsap County Superior Court Judge M. Karlynn Haberly ultimately ruled that the search warrant was valid. Haberly said that if the warrant had been for simple possession of marijuana, then police would've been more limited in searching computers, but since the warrant had more to do with delivery of marijuana, law enforcement was entitled to look at it.

The case has been set for trial April 14.

More at kitsapsun.com's Crime and Justice Forum: Had the first search warrant been ruled unlawful, the second warrant for the cameras may have been ruled the same, under a legal doctrine known as "fruit of a poisonous tree." Find out more at the forum.